{"title":"膀胱大小和形状对膀胱容量评估公式法准确性的影响。","authors":"Jintao Shen, Yaqi Zuo, Jing Song, Zhen Su, Shiwen Wang, Haihong Jiang","doi":"10.1007/s11255-024-04211-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>To explore the impact of bladder size and shape on the accuracy of the formula method (V = 0.52 × d<sub>1</sub> × d<sub>2</sub> × d<sub>3</sub>) for bladder volume evaluation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Data was retrospectively collected from 220 patients without reportable bladder diseases. CT images were imported into 3D Slicer software to measure the bladder volume V<sub>A</sub> (reference standards). Bladder volume was also measured by the formula method V<sub>B</sub> = 0.52 × d<sub>1</sub> × d<sub>2</sub> × d<sub>3</sub>. Results of these two methods were compared based on bladder size and shape.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The bldder volume was 121.0 ± 83.6 mL with the formula method, compared with 128.5 ± 82.6 mL measured by 3D Slicer (P < 0.0001). Patients were divided into three groups based on bladder size, the mean percent deviations between the two methods were 18.8 ± 20.8%, 3.4 ± 12.9% and 4.6 ± 10.6%, respectively. According to the bladder shape, it can be divided into 5 types. For round and triangle shapes, there was no significant statistical difference in the results of the two methods. For bladder shapes with ellipse, rectangle and irregular shape, the volume evaluated by the formula method was statistically lower. Their deviations were 9.7 ± 17.5%, 12.9 ± 9.6% and 14.4 ± 21.2%, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The accuracy of the formula method for estimating bladder volume is affected by bladder size and shape. Overall, the formula method tends to underestimate the bladder volume. The error of small-sized bladders is much greater than that of large-sized bladders. Furthermore, the formula method has high accuracy in measuring bladder volume with round and triangle shapes.</p>","PeriodicalId":14454,"journal":{"name":"International Urology and Nephrology","volume":" ","pages":"333-339"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Impact of bladder size and shape on the accuracy of formula method for bladder volume evaluation.\",\"authors\":\"Jintao Shen, Yaqi Zuo, Jing Song, Zhen Su, Shiwen Wang, Haihong Jiang\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11255-024-04211-5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>To explore the impact of bladder size and shape on the accuracy of the formula method (V = 0.52 × d<sub>1</sub> × d<sub>2</sub> × d<sub>3</sub>) for bladder volume evaluation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Data was retrospectively collected from 220 patients without reportable bladder diseases. CT images were imported into 3D Slicer software to measure the bladder volume V<sub>A</sub> (reference standards). Bladder volume was also measured by the formula method V<sub>B</sub> = 0.52 × d<sub>1</sub> × d<sub>2</sub> × d<sub>3</sub>. Results of these two methods were compared based on bladder size and shape.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The bldder volume was 121.0 ± 83.6 mL with the formula method, compared with 128.5 ± 82.6 mL measured by 3D Slicer (P < 0.0001). Patients were divided into three groups based on bladder size, the mean percent deviations between the two methods were 18.8 ± 20.8%, 3.4 ± 12.9% and 4.6 ± 10.6%, respectively. According to the bladder shape, it can be divided into 5 types. For round and triangle shapes, there was no significant statistical difference in the results of the two methods. For bladder shapes with ellipse, rectangle and irregular shape, the volume evaluated by the formula method was statistically lower. Their deviations were 9.7 ± 17.5%, 12.9 ± 9.6% and 14.4 ± 21.2%, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The accuracy of the formula method for estimating bladder volume is affected by bladder size and shape. Overall, the formula method tends to underestimate the bladder volume. The error of small-sized bladders is much greater than that of large-sized bladders. Furthermore, the formula method has high accuracy in measuring bladder volume with round and triangle shapes.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14454,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Urology and Nephrology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"333-339\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Urology and Nephrology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11255-024-04211-5\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/9/23 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Urology and Nephrology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11255-024-04211-5","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/9/23 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Impact of bladder size and shape on the accuracy of formula method for bladder volume evaluation.
Background: To explore the impact of bladder size and shape on the accuracy of the formula method (V = 0.52 × d1 × d2 × d3) for bladder volume evaluation.
Methods: Data was retrospectively collected from 220 patients without reportable bladder diseases. CT images were imported into 3D Slicer software to measure the bladder volume VA (reference standards). Bladder volume was also measured by the formula method VB = 0.52 × d1 × d2 × d3. Results of these two methods were compared based on bladder size and shape.
Results: The bldder volume was 121.0 ± 83.6 mL with the formula method, compared with 128.5 ± 82.6 mL measured by 3D Slicer (P < 0.0001). Patients were divided into three groups based on bladder size, the mean percent deviations between the two methods were 18.8 ± 20.8%, 3.4 ± 12.9% and 4.6 ± 10.6%, respectively. According to the bladder shape, it can be divided into 5 types. For round and triangle shapes, there was no significant statistical difference in the results of the two methods. For bladder shapes with ellipse, rectangle and irregular shape, the volume evaluated by the formula method was statistically lower. Their deviations were 9.7 ± 17.5%, 12.9 ± 9.6% and 14.4 ± 21.2%, respectively.
Conclusion: The accuracy of the formula method for estimating bladder volume is affected by bladder size and shape. Overall, the formula method tends to underestimate the bladder volume. The error of small-sized bladders is much greater than that of large-sized bladders. Furthermore, the formula method has high accuracy in measuring bladder volume with round and triangle shapes.
期刊介绍:
International Urology and Nephrology publishes original papers on a broad range of topics in urology, nephrology and andrology. The journal integrates papers originating from clinical practice.